Its the premier event in this country not a chance for local hacks to play for their friends. There's plenty of events where they can do that. Anyone under 700FR has no business playing in it.
End of the US Open?
- Thread starter Jason Robichaud
- Start date
How many times do we need to see Tiger Woods on TV? Why not show the player that is +15? People tune in to see the stars.
You can always still go to Derby City! One of our regulars, who just won our weekly tournament last week had to play Fedor in one of the early one pocket rounds at Derby City.
He complained to me about his unfortunate draw, but in what other sport can you get matched up against one of the top professional players in the world?
There are 128 tour players who have signed contracts (or that is the target number). They have spots reserved.
The remaining 128 are supposed to be filled from tournaments at remote locations. There are 12 qualifiers listed for the UK Open. I think it will be very, very hard to come up with 128 players by the qualifying tournament route.
I understand why you feel that way, but I like the "open" nature of it. How do you think it hurts the game?
Lots do. Lots of people also enjoy the underdogs. It's the same as any event, watch the matches you want and tune out for the matches you don't. What's the harm in them playing?
Also, when we reach the status of golf, I'll go ahead and agree we shouldn't be showing the 650 players.
IMO it should be 'open' TO A DEGREE as i said earlier. Look, nobody under 750FR really has any chance to even make the last eight much less win. Having qualifiers would not rule out lower rated players totally, they'd just have to play their ass off to get in. Allowing any caliber of player in lessens the name/prestige of the title. USOpen in golf/tennis do the exact same thing. This isn't 'the i showed up with my credit card open'.
I see your point, I just don't think it matters. Literally nobody is watching unless they're already a pool player. I don't see any prestige in any of the pool events. If this is the direction Matchroom wants to go, then I'll be ok with it, but I like watching one of my buddies get on the stream against an 800+ fargo. I also really like knowing that I can play if I want to.
If they actually end up with 128 qualified players from satellite events, I think we will see roughly the same level of players in the bottom half. I think the huge advantage of the qualifiers is that it can get a lot more players involved in the tournament even though they are one level removed. "Oh, look, there's the event Willie tried to qualify for. Let's watch."
I also think it's going to take a while before they have the qualifiers working well, like a few years.
A 750 player and a 650 player have about the same chance of making the final 8 so what’s the difference in which one gets to play? They are both dead money so why does it matter as long as they pay their entry.
I think having qualifiers to play has always been a great idea, rather than just having whoever signs up. It just seems like this is very sudden, without any qualifier tourney schedules announced. I was hoping they would go to a structure like this. Have qualifying events all over the country, to feed into the Open. Just seems rushed, at this point, is all.
Agreed. I don't think a 650 player will embarrass themself on the stream. Nor should they slow down the event terribly. I would think below 600 would be the break point... None of them will be advancing anyway.
Assuming they have qualifiers around the country, that’s more “open” than event access determined by quickly clicking a mouse button. Few have the money or time to make it to the US Open itself, and many of those that do haven’t clicked fast enough, but lots might play in an actual qualifier.
Of course if the qualifiers don’t fill (or there aren’t enough of them), then I agree qualifier by mouse clicking is better than missing players.
Times are changing. Two big things that have changed are the number of players signing up for these events and the skill levels of those players.
20 years ago it was a mostly US event. Jeremy Jones, Gabe Owen, and John Schmidt won the event between 2003-2005. Out of the final 64 players, 40-50 had US flags next to their name. Today it is the opposite, with the events only being won by 800+ players and only 4-5 US flags in the final 64, and 0-1 in the final 32. So the skill level to be live to cash has dramatically changed.
As for demand, the increase in participation is staggering. The event is filling up within the hour they open registration, leaving many of the worlds best shut out from the opportunity to compete.
Due to these changes it makes sense that Matchroom would have to change with the times. The divide between good amateurs and world class pros is growing greater, and the talent is deeper. I can understand how events like the US Open may no longer be the place for good amateurs to take a shot, and instead it can be reserved for the elite.
In turn, other tournaments such as Turning Stone, DCC, Texas Open, etc, will take on the role of those hybrid events that allow players of all levels to compete.
The world of pro pool has changed dramatically and permanently in the last 10 years and we cannot blame Matchroom for evolving with it. They have been a large part of the growth of the sport both for professionals and for audiences around the world, and I support whatever direction they need to go to sustain their success.
20 years ago it was a mostly US event. Jeremy Jones, Gabe Owen, and John Schmidt won the event between 2003-2005. Out of the final 64 players, 40-50 had US flags next to their name. Today it is the opposite, with the events only being won by 800+ players and only 4-5 US flags in the final 64, and 0-1 in the final 32. So the skill level to be live to cash has dramatically changed.
As for demand, the increase in participation is staggering. The event is filling up within the hour they open registration, leaving many of the worlds best shut out from the opportunity to compete.
Due to these changes it makes sense that Matchroom would have to change with the times. The divide between good amateurs and world class pros is growing greater, and the talent is deeper. I can understand how events like the US Open may no longer be the place for good amateurs to take a shot, and instead it can be reserved for the elite.
In turn, other tournaments such as Turning Stone, DCC, Texas Open, etc, will take on the role of those hybrid events that allow players of all levels to compete.
The world of pro pool has changed dramatically and permanently in the last 10 years and we cannot blame Matchroom for evolving with it. They have been a large part of the growth of the sport both for professionals and for audiences around the world, and I support whatever direction they need to go to sustain their success.
I think there are lots of people who watch Matchroom events live on TV in Europe who do not play pool regularly.
And considering how big a star Efren is in the Philippines I think there might be some pool fans there, too, who do not play regularly.
I think Matchroom was careful to make sure that didn't happen for the top 128 even before they had a ranking list.
pretty sure they will fill. figuring in a couple asia qualifiers and euro qualifiers, added to the many US based qualifiers, i think they'll have 128 + reserves.
ha, I thought they issued baby pinoys a cue with their first pacifier.